“Cousin Kate” and “The Seduction” Essay Example for Free

full cousin Kate and The Seduction EssayBoth verse forms ar written by female poets, who express their make do by exploring physical and unrestrained aspects. Both poets imply that men argon motivated by the physical side of love while women treasure the emotional side. The female characters in each poem to begin with be nave, innocent and vulnerable. However each being mistreated left them both undergo before their time. The Seduction is set in the mid 1970s when a teenage girl is at a party and is lured by a gaudy boy. Cousin Kate is about a young maiden who is taken advantage of by a lord ho then leaves her for her cousin Kate. Both are left with an experience and a child.The poems were written in very different distributor points and reflect love and marriage in different neighborly manors through time. Cousin Kate was written in the Victorian reign around the 1870s. Love and marriage in the 1870s was very different to present time, as the Victorian citizens nuz zle and mind-set was to expect women to provide children especially sons to become an heir, Your father would give lands for one, To wear his coronet. This shows that the father would be willing to pay a lot of capital (land) to have a grandson. Birth out of marriage was considered wrong The neighbors call you good and pure, Call me an outcast thing. Society saw Kate as a good person and a good marriage that they accepted into the community. Whilst they considered the cottage maiden as an outcast for having a child out of wedlock.They were also comprehend to have a duty to marry and obey their married man in the bible it says St.Paul in Ephesians 522 Wives, be subordinate to their husbands as to the Lord. For the husband is head of his wife just as Christ is head of the church, he himself the savior of the body. As the church is subordinate to Christ, so wives should be subordinate to their husbands in everything. Similarly in the Seduction although much much recent, societies vi ew of birth outside marriage especially among teenage pregnancy is still frowned upon. And better, now to wrench away, move away, fade away, Than to have the neighbors whisper that you always looked the type.The Seduction reflects a more modern attitude to love, where people frequently meet at social gatherings. She met him at the party and danced with him all night. This shows that relationships can be started without knowing each other, when you are drinking. The poem also shows that men and women are now sensed as equal, in that both men and women are at the party and both are drinking alcohol.Messages of love have been interlinked with the environment to help you picture their attitudes towards one another. The setting in the Seduction has been created by using imagery and personification which helps the reader to envisage the scene. Far from the blind windows of the tower blocks. This could imply that no one is there to see what could happen or that no one cares. An industri al dock yard is not a nice place to be and more or less probably not many people go there. Towards the frightening scum on the water, because this setting is so unromantic it implies that the chinchy boy is only after one thing. She chattered on, and stared at the water, The Mersey, green as a septic wound. Here the author has utilize a simile to help formulate nervousness of the girl. These words are effective because it emphasizes her innocents, although it seems to be dark and ery.The opening of Cousin Kate tells us that she is just a simple country girl workings to live. I was a cottage maiden Hardened by sun and air, Contented with my cottage mates,. Having this opening shows the emphasis of her innocents and it gives us a small head of who she is. The author Christina Rossetti has pieced together a small picture of what her life was like but tells you enough for you to finish the scene in you mind. This all changes when later on it contrasts with the mention of her cousi n Kate and the new lords. Both poets have used the environment help them create an image and an halo which when added to the dramatic monologue is very effective. similarly it transfers the feelings and emotions from the character to the reader.The poets have both used a range of techniques to help present the atmosphere and attitude to love. The atmosphere at the beginning of The Seduction is quieting refine after leaving a party with a random person who has got her drunk. It slowly turns into a dark and depressing mood but the girl is excited, nave and unaware. The poet has used words like she giggled and he muttered. This is prosperous as it shows the contrast between the innocent girl and the sinister boy. At the end of the poem the atmosphere has changed to a despaired attitude this shows how the poets view has changed. The emphasis of the change is described using poetic techniques like Connotation, Imagery, Oxymorons and alliteration. And a bag filled with shimmering, swe et blusher thinner. This implies that the boy was going off to get high when he is meant to be at school, I have chosen this quote also as an vitrine of imagery and alliteration.Similarly the beginning of Cousin Kate is peaceful, illustrated though words such as contended, care and flaxen. However later on in the poem the narrators feelings are mixed Even so I sit and howl in the dust shows that she does feel sorrow and the reader can empathise with her. alike the poet has used dust to create a sad atmosphere. Whereas she perceives her cousin as wealthy and happy You sit in gold and sing. This gives contrast from execrable and rich, sorrow and joy. The narrator is also angry with the lord, I would have spit in his face. This illustrates her anger towards him, which creates tension and increases the readers knowledge of the narrator.another(prenominal) way the poets express their attitudes to love and marriage is through the relationships between men and women. Cousin Kate sugges ts the role of the men in the Victorian society were much more superior to women as they are the hunters and gatherers. By this I mean that the men are the leaders and are loved by women and the women should do as they are told. Conversely the male in the poem is not seen as likeable character, He lured me to his palace home. The word lured projects an image of an ungentlemanly character which has wrongly persuaded the victim. This is effective as he treats her as she is an object He changed me like a glove. Equally The Seduction the male character is perceived as someone who is not a pleasant person and a bad influence, He spat into the river.This is valuable as it illustrates how shocking and uncouth the boy is. Eileen McAuley has used verbs to convey the actions of the characters in The Seduction for example the girls movements are submissive toward the strong minded boy. Although the same as Cousin Kate the women in that period of time are meant to be submissive to their master . Consequently both poems are exploring the role of women in relationships and despite the fact that there is over a hundred years between the poems they both seem to be implying that society still criticise young mothers. Although the men are described as sleazy and sinister, this could be a miss conception as these may be the views from a women perspective. These descriptions of the male characters are portrayed as a stereotypical flag-waver male and could be offensive from a mans point of view.Finally the two poets have used the structure to help represent the theme of love. Both poems are written in stanzas and each tells another part of the story. Cousin Kate is set out in a very traditional manner which help you to discernment the thoughts and emotions of the narrator. It repeats certain words in the first person like I, he and you this is done to show the difference between the characters but mostly cousin Kate and the narrator because Kate has stolen the narrators man (fath er) also because of the style it has created the piece of writing to be a dramatic monologue. Similarly The Seduction also uses a lot of repeating of words in the third person like she and he this helps to show that it is a narrative.The poem is almost split into two sections the fir half concentrates on the build up to when she discovers that she is pregnant and the second half only talks about if only it had not happened also the first half is showing her innocents forming into an experience. This is successful because she is a young girl who still day dreams and wishes to be out with her friends Day trips to Blackpool, jumping all the rides? McAuley has also used a rhetorical scruple as if to say should she be out with her friends or does she get what she is deserved but then it carries on to question what does the girl deserve?I recollect that there is a subliminal message beyond the words and technical styles of writing, in both poems which can be related to the present time . The most evident one is not to be naive and fall for boys tricks. However boy tricks are not always bad and good things may come of it. I consider the most successful technique is not a poetic technique, but more the structure the poets have written them in because it creates the mood, the speed and most of all in my eyes the tension and suspense.

Module one review parenting skills Essay Example for Free

Module one review parenting skills Essay1. What are the different parenting styles used by families? Which do you think is better? Why? The first type of parenting styles is the authoritarian style where the parents have either authority and say so in every matter. The sustain type is the permissive style where the parents are extremely passive and give the children a lot of power. The third is the democratic style of parenting where the parent considers the thoughts and feelings of the children but in conclusion they make the decision. The democratic style is my personal favorite because it makes they child feel like their opinion matters but does not give them the power to run all over their parent.2. What makes a person ready for parenthood? When should an individual consider entering parenthood? Who should postpone parenthood? Should everyone become a parent last? Do you think some people should not become parents altogether. I think a person is ready for parenthood when they are financially stable, emotionally stable and have a good support system behind them to help them raise a child whether that means they are married or they have family. I think an individual should consider entering parenthood when they had all of the things previously stated meaning that they are ready and when they are century% sure that they ready and that they are not being pressured into it. I think that young people, newlyweds, and people with any doubt at all should postpone parenthood. I do not think that everyone is meant to be a parent so not everyone should eventually become one, some people are better tally not having children. I think there are people in this world who should never have children altogether because they are not capable of providing a safe and loving home for them.

The continued discrimination against homosexuals

The continued discrimination against homointimatesHomosexuality is very common in society. However umpteen individuals still discriminate against them. Their prejudgments are based on stereotypes, and lack of information. Due to our social perception, quite a little who are assorted from them is deem to be threatening. In this report, discrimination against homosexuals will be discussed, with facts, different supporting examples and cases from capital of Singapore and the United States, with Singapore existence the more tradition all in ally conservative one. Ways to reduce discriminations against them is also mentioned and explored.The progeny and who are involved?We brush off fall in love, but why cant they?Homosexuality is romantic and/or sexual attraction or behavior among members of the corresponding sex or gender, making up around 10% of the population. Sadly, they continue to be one of the least protected by the government and discriminated against by the society. Homos exuality was categorized as a genial disorder until 1973. The words gay and lesbian are used to refer to homosexual men and women and bisexual refers to those that are attracted to two men and women.Brief accounting on Homosexuals in SingaporeIn 1960s, Homosexuality was categorized as a condition in a Singapore Armed Forces (SAF). Before enlistment, all enlistees would undergo a medical checkup and asked to declare their quirk status. Those declared will be downgraded to a Public Employment Status of 3 and were charge to be clerks.In 1998, Senior Minister, Mr Lee Kuan Yew , live on CNN International, said, what we are doing as a government is to leave people to live their own lives so long as they dont impinge on other people. I mean, we dont harass anybody. these words helped set the tenor for official policy on crotchet for umpteen years. His comments is said to be one of the most significant events relating to gay rights.Before 2003, homosexuals were forbidden from being em ployed in sensitive positions in the Singapore polite Service. Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong abolished this in a widely publicized statement.In 2006, Liberty League, an organization that promotes gender and sexual health for the individual, family and society, was granted $100,000.Brief account statement on Homosexuals in the USAfter W.W.11, thousands of homosexuals were dis loveably fired from the armed services and jobs, due to public display of homosexuality, and were ostracized from families and communities. In early 1953, homosexuality became by a necessary and sufficient reason fire any federal employee from ones job.In the 1970s, in some cities, anti- discrimination for homosexual laws was placed. California had its first openly gay elected official Harvey Milk.Compared to Singapore, the US has a richer and more open homosexuality culture. In recent years, the US has slowly begun acceptance for homosexuality. Several video programs with elements of homosexuality, Will and G race, Glee, Queer Eye for the Straight Guy, Greys Anatomy were aired. As the popularity of these shows increases, the gay community is closer to acceptance and justice by the society. They cast off gay conceit parades and homosexual marriages supported by many another(prenominal) areas of US, un identical Singapore.Discrimination against HomosexualsWith the laws placed and the better recognition of the homosexual community, the situation in both countries seems favorable. However, homosexuals still causa rampant stereotypes from the world and may worsen if deeper understanding of homosexuals is not being promoted and measures are not taken. This issuing has been chosen be consume this is a very essential issue in this society, and feels that they should have the same rights as heterosexuals. There have been many incidents of bullying and victimizing homosexuals that led to deaths in the US. Many have gone into depression. These should not be tolerated and something has to be d one.Homosexuals do not come out for many reasons, the most common being that they are uncomfortable to declare to any society that is comprehend to be homophobic.Negative stereotyping is often a result of homophobia, which refers to an irrational fear, prejudice or discrimination towards homosexuals, and can be name-calling and teasing to serious crimes like shame and murder.Positive stereotypes, or counter-types, also exist but may be no less harmful, as they are still oversimplified views of the group being stereotyped. some examples of the common stereotypes that gays are described to be expressing too much of his feelings, very vulnerable and sensitive, likes touching himself and other people. They are also stereotyped to love talking about feminine things the use of cosmetics, very concerned with their lips, skin and hair protections.Why this prejudice and discrimination affect society and is important.Current situation in SingaporeAlthough being homosexual in Singapore is no t illegal, performing any homosexual acts in public or privately, is. Section 377 of the Singapore penal Code records the penalty for indecency between individuals which includes consensual, private, adult homosexual acts imprisonment is up to 2 years.A gay group was denied permission to hold a forum on the role of homosexuals in society. The local media avoids homosexual issues in fear of getting their licenses suspended. In schools, sexuality courses focus more on heterosexuality-the only(prenominal) mention of homosexuality reminds students that it is illegal. Moreover, homosexual couples in Singapore, cannot rightfully own a home through the public housing scheme, thus many rent as private housing is unaffordable to them.Unsurprisingly, this shows that Singaporean society remains deeply conservative and the governments are still not as open to discussions about gay rights. Attitudes towards homosexuality are also tied up closely with the different religious values in this mult i-racial society, like Muslims and Christianity which considers it as a sin.In Singapore, the government uses Confucian readings to create a certain amount of ideological coherence in its version of Asian Values and to give it some academic respectability. From an interview, 68.6% of the surveyors expressed minus attitudes towards homosexuality. Christians and Muslims were found to be least tolerant, older people are less tolerant and more educated people are more tolerant. Therefore, Singapore who is a traditionally conservative society may not be ready for a change.Current situation in United StatesRecently, there have been many news on homosexual bullying leading to suicides, for example , Tyler Clementi, a 19 year old student from Rutgers University. After his college roommate lived-streamed Tyler having sexual dealings with his boyfriend, Tyler threw himself off a bridge. Asher Brown was a 13-year-old was tormented for the way he dressed and being gay. His bullies acted out m ock gay sex acts in classes. His parents repeatedly contacted school officials on his bullying. Nothing was ever done. He shot himself in the head.Policy on lesbian, gay, bisexual, in US has evolved over time and varies between different regions. Five states and one district have legalized same-sex marriage. President Obama announced that he will work with Congress and the military to repeal the dont ask, dont tell policy that forbids homosexuals from openly serving in the military. However, there is still much opposition, commenting that homosexuals identities should not be made known.However, there have been many interviews and surveys that show that the US is slowly evaluate homosexuals. For example the graph below shows that attitudes towards homosexuality in the US, over the years seem more positive.Source http//www.norc.org/GSS+Website/Browse+GSS+Variables/Subject+Index/Why is it important?A continuation of homosexual discrimination is detrimental to their mental health, whic h may increase suicidal tendencies or other mental afflictions. There are many websites contending that homosexuality is a sin, stating that it is entirely up to choice, easily changeable, and giving excuses to put down homosexuals, using reasons like God hates fags.People tend to associate human immunodeficiency virus and AIDS as a gay related disease, thinking that as long as they avoid having sex with homosexuals, they are safe from HIV. This ignorance can cause them to practice unsafe sexual intercourse.Stereotyping them to be rapist, pedophiles are very common and these send a wrong message to the public, causing fear. This increases the fear in homosexuals for being discovered to be gay, causing them to feel immense stress and pressure, doubling the chance of depression and suicidal tendencies.The rejection and misinformation results in homophobia causing them to bully other people , verbal assaults, causing other people psychological stress and pain. Homosexuals may also face family and friends rejections. The result is a vicious cycle of prejudice and discrimination.Where can we start to fix the problem?How such prejudice and discrimination creates inequality to the society.The law, sec 377a, criminalizing sexual acts between homosexuals, encourages Singaporeans discriminate against homosexuals indirectly. Other countries have accepted same sex marriage and have laws to protect them. Homosexuals should also have the same benefits as heterosexuals. In Singapore, some teachers were being forced to quit because of their sexuality like Otto Fong, and Alfian Saat. In national service, they are downgraded to positions like clerks, and disqualified from some sensitive areas. All these are deemed to be discrimination and homosexual inequality.Workable solutions for individuals and institutionsFrom what I have found out, these prejudice and discriminations comes from ignorance and misinformation. Unbiased sex education can help to change mindsets of people abou t homosexuality at large. Singaporeans are consistently taught that sexual acts between homosexuals are illegal but do not talk about why and how we should learn to accept them in our society. This is an important issue, thus this topic should be in Civic Moral Education where students can learn about it. The society can also educate homosexuality in the media, tv set shows, or host public homosexuality talks and events. For example, in the US, they have a Wear a Purple Shirt Day in honor of homosexuals that committed suicides due to bullying.We as individuals have to learn not to stereotype and listen to peoples misconceptions, but taking initiative to learn more about homosexuality from places like, internet and books. We are more than capable of making our own decisions, and more than capable of being accepting and inclusive.We should create an environment of diversity and acceptance for both heterosexuals and homosexuals.http//socyberty.com/issues/prejudice-and-discrimination-o n-homosexuality-in-singapore/ixzz174Rz1JxFhttp//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singapore_gay_history_2000_to_2009_A.D.http//www.sgwiki.com/wiki/Singapore_gay_historyhttp//knol.google.com/k/discrimination-against-homosexuals-in-singaporehttp//www.norc.org/GSS+Website/Browse+GSS+Variables/Subject+Index/http//articles.cnn.com/2010-01-27/politics/obama.gays.military_1_repeal-policy-that-bars-gays-servicemembers-legal-defense-network?_s=PMPOLITICShttp//filipspagnoli.wordpress.com/stats-on-human-rights/statistics-on-discrimination/statistics-on-discrimination-of-homosexuals/http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_the_United_States

Spanish Language Varieties in Spain and in Mexico

Spanish Language Varieties in Spain and in MexicoSpanish terminology varieties in Spain and in Mexico.George Bernard Shaw regarded Great Britain and America as two countries divided by a common vocabulary. This viewpoint can be also utilize to Spain and Mexico, the Spanish-let looseing countries with different language varieties and dictions that have been formed under the influence of specific historical, cultural, political and neighborly events. Despite the fact that Spanish is spoken in many countries, the major varieties of Spanish can be observed in Latin America and Spain, where the language, according to Cl are Mar-Molinero (2000), is buoyant and secure (p.18).Spanish belongs to the Indo-European language family and comes from Vulgar Latin language, although Spanish vocabulary consists of Italian, French and Arabic conditions. Spanish language in Latin America has five major varieties the Caribbean, the South American Pacific, the Argentinian-Uruguyan-Paraguayan, the Ce ntral American, and the Highland (or Standard) Latin American. However, this classification is too generalised, as it is based only on the differences in pronunciation. Due to the immensity of the territory where Latin American Spanish is spoken (Lipski, 1994 p.3), linguists analyse language varieties along geographical, political, ethnic, musicological and social lines (Lipski, 1994 p.3). The residents of Mexico mainly use the Caribbean and Highland Latin American dialects that emerged after the formation of Peruvian Spanish. Nahuatl dialect that belongs to the Uto-Aztecan language group (Andrews, 1975) and has the greatest influence in central Mexico (Lipski, 1994 p.6) is an ancient Spanish dialect. About cardinal million Mexican mickle speak Nahuatl dialect nowadays. In Spain at that place are also two principal language varieties the Castilian and the Andalusian dialects that were formed in the middle ages, although both(prenominal) regions of Northern and Confederate Spai n create new(prenominal) specific dialects. As Spanish language descends from Castile, the Spanish region that became a centre of political significance since the thirteenth century, the Castilian dialect is one of the most wide mobilize varieties and is accepted as a national criterion in Spain. Mar-Molinero (2000) considers that the phenomenon of Castilianisation was initiated by the Visigoths however, it was only in the eighteenth century when the Castilian dialect displaced other language varieties as a result of Charles III 1768 declaration, demonstrating a profound impact of political prevalence on linguistic prevalence. Mar-Molinero (2000) also states that the Andalusian dialect considerably influenced the formation of the Standard Latin American (pp.36-37), although this viewpoint is strongly opposed by sociolinguists. Other crucial language varieties in Spain are Euskara, Galician and Catalan these dialects have some par completelyels with Portuguese and French languages, although they do not belong to the Indo-European language family. The emergence of these three Spanish varieties is closely connected with the give of nationalism. The Levantine varieties also constitute an important group of dialects apply in such Spanish regions as Alicante, Valencia and Castelln. People in these areas currently use Catalan/Valencian, Murcian, Andalusian, Aragon, and La Manche/Castile dialects.The differences in all these Spanish language varieties attribute to pronunciation, vocabulary and grammar (Penny, 2000). In particular, pronunciation of the Standard Latin American differs from the Castilian, similar to the dissimilarities between British English and American English. In the Castilian dialect the sounds ce or ci are changed into th gracias (thanks) appears as gratheas however, in the Standard Latin American the word gracias is pronounced as gras-see-as. Such separate pronunciation of the word grasseeas is a characteristic feature of the Standard Latin Ame rican dialect. In the Castilian dialect some dustup are ended in a vocable vowel, losing their last consonants, while two Mexican dialects are characterised by the pronunciation of final consonants. Overall, the manner of speaking in Mexico is slow in comparison with the speech in the majority of Spanish regions (Hill Hill, 1986) however, the Caribbean, or Lowland dialect is defined as a kinda prompt and informal variety of Spanish language.In addition to the differences in pronunciation, there are some differences in grammar. In Mexican Spanish ustedes (you) is utilised both for formal and informal address, while in Castilian Spanish there are two words for formal and informal address ustedes and vosotros, respectively. Some verbs in the Caribbean and Highland Latin American dialects have changed their initial forms, acquiring certain Anglicisms and Americanisms. In particular, Mexican residents say, Apliqu a la Universidad (I applied to the university), while Spanish people u tilise a more precise form Postul a la universidad. Similarly, Spaniards in Spain prefer to utilise pasado perfecto (the compound tense that is similar to English state Perfect tense) Yo he viajado a los Estados Unidos (I have traveled to the USA). Mexican people use a more simplified tense pretrito indefinido (English Past Indefinite), for example, Viaj a Estados Unidos (I travelled to the USA). According to Julia Kristeva (1989), Language is so intimately linked to man and society that they are inseparable (p.3) thus, the utilisation of Anglicisms and Americanisms in Mexican Spanish reflects historical and social differences between Spain and Mexico. Duncan Green (1997) points at the impact of the United States on language and identity of Mexican population in particular, the author states that The mass media has become a battleground in the struggle to define Latin Americans identity (pp.98-99). The simplification of Spanish language in Mexico reveals that various social chan ges switch language, and language shapes the identity of Mexican people. As Mar-Molinero (2000) states, Not only does language have an instrumental role as a means of communication, it also has an highly important symbolic role as marker of identity (p.3). Due to the fact that social identities of Mexican and Spanish people differ, Spanish language of Mexico and Spain is characterised by a instead diverse vocabulary. For instance, the word Okay is translated as Sale in Mexico, and as Chungo in Madrid similarly, the word work is rendered as chambear in Mexico and as currar in Spain.Another difference that distinguishes Mexican Spanish from Spanish in Spain is the preservation of archaisms in the Caribbean and Highland Latin American dialects. Such words and expressions as rale (All right), Ya mero (almost) or Qu pedo? (What is going on?) are normal for Mexican Spanish, but they are not utilised in Spain. John Lipski (1994) considers that these language varieties emerged as a resu lt of cultural and social interactions of Spain and Mexico with other countries. The Standard Latin American dialect was considerably influenced by Italian and African immigrants who arrived in Latin America at the end of the nineteenth the beginning of the twentieth centuries (Lipski, 1994 pp.11-12). Skidmore and Smith (2000) reveal the similar viewpoint, claiming that in Latin America languages, food, sports, and music all show profound and continuing African influence (p.356). Simultaneously, the Standard Latin American and the Caribbean dialects reflect native roots, especially Indian roots that are rather distinct in Mexican Spanish. For instance, the language of the Mayans serves as the basis for more than thirty dialects in Mexico, let alone the language of the Aztecs. In particular, many innovative Mexican dialects preserve initial and final sounds tl- in certain words, like Nahuatl, Quetzalcoatl, the god of Aztecs, or Tlaxcala, Mexican state. As Skidmore and Smith (2000) point out, Aside from the Mayans, Aztecs, and Incas, there were many other Indian cultures. In the area of moderne-day Mexico alone there were over 200 different linguistic groups (p.14). However, the impact of the Castilian language on the formation of Mexican Spanish is the greatest, as the Castilian was the only language taught in Mexican schools with the arrival of Spanish settlers. Thus, three major aspects aggravated the differences between Spanish spoken in Spain and Spanish spoken in Mexico Spanish settlements in Mexico, immigration of English, Italian and African people, and finally, linguistic drift.Analysing Spanish language varieties in Mexico and Spain, the adjudicate demonstrates that the differences mainly exist in spoken language, influencing such linguistic aspects as vocabulary, pronunciation and grammar. The Caribbean and Highland Latin American dialects in Mexico and the Castilian and the Andalusian dialects in Spain are characterised by diverse accent, idioms and unique words, but these variants are integral parts of Spanish language. As a result of various social and political changes, modern Mexican Spanish has been exposed to the process of Americanisation, which considerably simplifies vocabulary and grammar of Spanish dialects in Mexico and intensifies the differences between Mexican Spanish and Spanish spoken in Spain. The spread of travels and mass media changes Spanish language in both Mexico and various areas of Spain, revealing unique cultural identities of different Spanish-speaking groups. BibliographyAndrews, J. R. (1975) Introduction to Classical Nahuatl. Austin, University of Texas.Green, D. (1997) Faces of Latin America. Nottingham, Russell Press, Latin American Bureau.Hill, J. H. and Hill, K.C. (1986) Speaking Mexicano. Tucson, University of Arizona Press.Kristeva, J. (1989) Language The Unknown An Initiation Into Linguistics. London, Harvest Wheatsheaf.Lipski, J.M. (1994) Latin American Spanish. London, New York, Longma n.Mar-Molinero, C. (2000) The Politics of Language in the Spanish-Speaking human race from Colonization to Globalization. London, New York, Routledge.Penny, R. (2000) Variation and Change in Spanish. Cambridge Cambridge University Press.Skidmore, T. E. and Smith, P.H. (2000) Modern Latin America. 5th edition. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

Analysing Corruption and Organised Crime in Russia

Analysing rot and Organised Crime in Russia corruptness as provide be examined, was zip un apply in the post-Soviet economy for its perceived jump and that of arrange legal philosophy-breaking had their origins in the Soviet duration. In the Soviet substance privy enterp swot up on an soulfulness or business home had outicially non been allowed from when the new-sprung(prenominal) economic constitution was abandoned in the 1920s and with the tweetd collectivization of land during the 1930s.Under the Stalinist State the economy was planned and commanded by the Communist Party via the Soviet compacts state structure. In theory the Soviet State retainled every aspect of the Soviet economy. It set prices it controlled industrial divulgeputs, jargoning services and foreign exchange rates. However, in practice there was a flourishing minacious grocery store in luxury goods and foreign exchange rates before the semipolitical and scotch reforms started by Mikhail Gorbachev in the 1980s. His collimate policies of Glasnost and Perestroika, political openness and scotch restructuring were intended to pro consider fit the Soviet Union. Instead the Soviet Union would dissect leaving its successor states working towards democracy and capitalism whilst veneer up to the worry of change magnitude putrescence and nonionized villainy.The level of decom site if not set up offensive activity during the Soviet sequence might not be too balmy to establish exactly. The Soviet authorities afterward all kept the true state of the economy hidden from the western hemisphere correct if its citizens experient hardships and shortages. The leading members of the politburo had been the solely ones with a realistic view of the economy. The wantonisation of the economy in all parts of the power Soviet Union since 1991 furbish up believe slackly led to an attach of corruptness and organize aversion. Clampdowns on organised disgust and depra vation return lots been half hearted when they adopt been carried out both during and after the Soviet era. Explanations for this startle in decomposition and organised abhorrence exit now be described and examined. few of these causes pre-date the whirl around of the Soviet Union whilst another(prenominal)(a)s emerged later(prenominal). ominous markets pull throughed prior to the move over of the Soviet Union often bringing consumers goods that were unavailable in the state-run shops, goods that were umpteen quantifys exchanged instead of sold to avoid breaking the law. arrive at in establish with the grim markets went corruption and bribery. Black marketers frequently resorted to bribing communist party officials, the natural law and the KGB or they in turn extorted money off the black marketers. The KGB rough eons recruited some(prenominal) of the black marketers to pronounce on their rivals and their customers. The much the Soviet economy faltered the fa ster the black-market grew, providing community with goods not available in the shops. Those marketers that did not bribe officials often nominate their homes or businesses raided or got put in jail, those that gainful up could go about their business undisturbed. The Soviet leadership started to have concerns about scotch stagnation, organised shame and to a lesser extent corruption in the early 1980s exactly none of them have the appearance _or_ semblanceed to under(a)stand the extent of the scotch malaise. The long years of stagnation continued until despite the rapid deaths of three general secretaries of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) among 1982-1985.Leonid Brezhnev during his time in drag down had done nothing to halt economic decline and in situation worsenednedned it by accelerating the arms race with the United States and invading Afghanistan. It has been estimated that as lots(prenominal) as 50% of the Soviet Unions annual budges was worn-o ut(a) on defence mechanism or related products and projects. However, that was money that the Soviet Union no monthlong had to spare. His immediate successor Yuri Andropov started a driving against bribery and corruption that petered out with his death in 1984. When Gorbachev replaced Konstantin Chernenko a year later he pledge to reform the Soviet Union. Instead his policies would promote its collapse and lead to change magnitude corruption and organised crime in the sixteen successor states. The problem with Stalinist economic planning was that it created and perpetuated a shortage economy motivated to a greater extentover by harsh orders from the centre. It kept most of the battalion every bit poor overlook for those that found ways around the ashes.By the 1980s the idea of abandoning the communist command economy in favour of capitalism and liberal democracy gained soil not only in the Soviet Union only also in Central and Eastern Europe. For the re reasons could loo k at the neo-liberal insure of the Thatcher and Reagan administrations, perhaps the scourge social and economic effects in parts of Latin America would have been more relevant. thither was of course the example of the New Economic Policy that had allowed the Soviet economy to recover from the ravages of civil war, an attractive example to communists that valued to reform the ashes but also for the non-communists that wished to replace it. There was one theme of pro-capitalist economists that hoped to bring in a market system to Russia, they were the new-fangled re precedents. Yeger Gaider whose family was amongst the elites of the Soviet nomenklatura ironically enough headed the young reformers. They were just looking for soulfulness to carry out their plans and not power for themselves and would eventually team up with Boris Yeltsin a highly effective (when healthy) populist politician with only a control understanding of economics. alongside Yeltsin, they had the dream of dismantling communism. However, the way in which communism was dismantled across the former Soviet Union would contribute greatly to the lift of organised crime alongside the already high levels of corruption.In the first years of Gorbachevs rule his governance move to preserve the Soviet political system whilst reforming its economic system, little realising that these reforms would fail and thus contribute to the rise of corruption and organised crime as well as the disintegration of the Soviet Union. He wanted to make the system worktop its full capacity without moving to a capitalist economy or inducing economic suffering. The authorities attempted to increase productivity by reducing alcohol consumption and the sickness that was often connected to it, but he did not run an anti corruption campaign immediately. Gorbachev would have banned vodka but feared the ban would be circumvented by organised crime large numbers, plus the tax revenues that kept the Soviet government solvent. one and only(a) man who had started Ananta-corruption campaign was Boris Yeltsin who was the capital of the Russian Federation party boss until his sudden dismissal by Gorbachev during November 1987.Gorbachev believed he had removed his greatest rival but had in particular make a very basic political blunder, as Yeltsin was no longer controllable and determined to avenge his declination from power.By 1989 it became clear that the Soviet economic system was unsustainable or beyond reforming and Gorbachev introduced some capitalist measures. Those measures included allowing subatomic private businesses to operate from overbearing 1990 and a series of de-regulations and privatisations amid October 1990 and July 1991. Economic reforms brought increase opportunities to organised criminals and budding capitalist entrepreneurs, a distinction in the former Soviet Union that is not always clear. The sudden creations of small businesses change magnitude chances for investment s and money showy or even to takeover privatised companies. Decades of communist economic and political rule left hand a legacy that was difficult to shake off immediately in the post-Soviet era. Yeltsin and his contemporaries found it difficult to see the world from outside of a communist perspective. The communist legacy of patronage, privileges, corruption and perks would contribute to the rise of corruption and organised crime in the post-Soviet era. As the system started to collapse across the Soviet Union law and order began to decline with it thus allowing increased opportunities for organised crime and corruption as well as increased fieldist and ethnic tensions.The political disintegration of the Soviet Union went hand in hand with its economic disintegration and declining levels of law and order in all the successor re unexclusives. The end of the Soviet Union was hastened by the failure of the communist putsch in heroic 1991. The Baltic States had already broke away from the Soviet Union and was already on their way to capitalist economies. Russian president Boris Yeltsin look to stand for the twin transition from communist state to liberal democracy and planned socialist economy to neo-liberal capitalism although this is not exactly what happened. Contrary to Mikhail Gorbachev, Boris Yeltsin had believed that the dissolving of the Soviet Union could be a positive rather than a disastrous event although m either of his Russian compatriots might not have hold with him. For the other former re overts, it was a case of independence at last. Perhaps those that took advantage of the break up through organised crime or corruption would have a edacity with him. The Yeltsin government at first enthusiastically backed rapid and radical reforms, radical economics carried out by a base of advisors dubbed the the young reformers. Russia and the other former republics of the Soviet Union had very primitive banking and monetary systems that shewed app arently ideal opportunities for Russian and foreign investors. Those acting as go- amids in business deals could make small fortunes by doing so. The transition to capitalism offered the prospect of do millions, it also led to the increase in organised crime and corruption as gangsters menace investors, businesses and often fought each other. The Russian and other governments seemed incapable of monitoring, containing or preventing that rise.The Yeltsin government was hampered in its efforts to control and administer the regions let alone weight-lift the rise in crime because the remaining regional regulators were by and large communist nomenklatura and apparatchiks and unwilling to do as Moscow commanded. These bureaucrats forged links with industrialists in their region providing basis for ongoing and future corruption. The bitter power struggles between President and Parliament during the 1992-1993 period distracted them from trying to solve the countrys problems and allowed t he regions greater liberty and the increasing add to causeher of organised crime gangs broad rein across much of Russia and the rest of the former Soviet Union. They also spent much time and effort trying to persuade the public the other side was more corrupt and had greater links to organised crime than they did. atomic number 53 deputy governor indicated the scale of corruption in the outback(a)r parts of Siberia that to start accompany you probably have to bribe forty bureaucrats.Organised crime gangs utilize the decline in government control to organise protection rackets to fleece investors and small businesses. There was an alarming increase in violent crimes and impinge ons as gangs competed for control of their victims and clients or punished those that would not pay for their dubious protection. The number of killings related to gang war farthermoste escalated dramatically. Moscow and the newly renamed St Petersburg have been the centres of most of that gang warfare . Corruption was not but confined to the Mafia gangs it also extended to the police, the armed forces and civil servants. In Russia traffic police were confused in robbing motorists also teaming up with local gangs to force motorists to hand over their cars, or to pay them fines for non-existent offences or face their cars being confiscated. Corruption and the buying and change of anything and everything was so dewy-eyedspread that young female university students would labor to become hard currency call girls or the mistresses of oligarchs or wealthy businessmen, whilst jobless youths would advertise their services for contract killings.One remorseless organised crime gang even went as far as murdering car owners and disposing of their bodies to steal their cars. Organised crime and the number of crime gangs increased dramatically as the political elites spent more time arguing amongst each other rather than fighting crime and corruption. Nobody in the public or the media be lieved that Boris Yeltsin would succeed in rooting out organised crime and corruption, after all every single Soviet leader had promised to do the same since 1917. later all his only previous crack down on corruption and organised crime in Moscow had been stopped it its tracks by Gorbachev when he was take as the Moscow party boss. The official crime figures for 1992 give a strong indication of the deteriorating law and order situation. The number of murders had increased by 40%whilst there was an even larger increase in robbery up by 60%. The overall number of registered crimes, bearing in mind that many crimes remained unreported went up to 2.76 million. In fact, the contending elites accused each other of corruption to score points off each other whilst the public were not interested in their squabbles and the 3,000or so crime gangs carried on regardless. Of the newly private run business in Russia and the Commonwealth of Independent States those3,000 gangs were able to pocket perhaps as much as 40 % of the turnovers early as 1993.Corruption was never too far from the surface in the former Soviet Union. It should have not been a surprise then that corruption and organised crime would rise in the post-Soviet as they already headstrong foundations and connections to outside crime gangs. During the Soviet era if an case-by-case knew or bribed the mature officials they could get the best luxury items, property deals or their children into the finest schools or universities. So, nobody could doubt that there would be greater levels of corruption when the restraints of the Soviet system were removed. In fact, corruption dated back into the Imperial Russian past, were the civil service had been unsalaried but able to accept gifts or payments in kind. The CPSU may have claimed to be responsible for the leading role in society and the economy, some of its members took a leading role in the black market or for a small bribe get tidy sum things that would not no rmally be available.In Belarus the movement towards independence was given a new impetus byte relish to be rid of greedy and corrupt communist party leaders. The unravelling of the Soviet hegemony over Eastern Europe gave an opportunity for the more entrepreneurial members of the withdrawing Soviet array to make their fortunes. The pickings could be rich for the Soviet army had large areas of land and housing to sell. When Gorbachev make a deal with the West German government to sell Soviet military bases in the former East Germany back to them most of the best pickings had already gone. The Soviet defence minister Dmitrii Yazov mirthfully joined in the schemes that led to the disappearance of the Soviet army assets without a trace. Yazov may have enjoyed making money for himself but he was wholeheartedly against political and economic reform. He would be one of the main leaders of the August 1991 coup. After all, under the Soviet system the higher an one-on-ones linear perspec tive within the party, the KGB or the armed forces they could expect greater share of the perks and the spoils.Just how much money the corrupt communist party members made may not beknown exactly, much of the evidence was destroyed just before the final failed coup of August 1991. Those party members that did not get into trouble pursual the coup could take place themselves in a good scene to make money in the brave new post -Soviet world. That was because they already knew how to operate in corrupt systems and some already had links with organised crime. For many of the small traders that operated largely il jurally during the Soviet era the only real difference between the past and the post-Soviet present was whom they paid for the privilege of staying in business. Now they had to pay organised crime gangs to stay in business and to stay alive rather than bribe communist party officials or members of the KGB, or if they were unlucky they would have to pay them all. Corruption a nd organised crime increased in the post-Soviet era, but it had great potential during the Soviet era and the right conditions would fuel a massive expansion.For much of the former Soviet Union these conditions were present in the early 1990s. niggling crime was rumoured to be rife amongst civil servants and state employees, for instance in 1993 the Russian Interior Ministry recorded 13,000 such crimes, that was thought to be the tip of the iceberg. It was estimated that near all shops paid protection and perhaps four fifths of businesses and financial institutes did the same. The organised crime gangs had a virtual free reign on their prospective victims, as the number of simple police was inadequate even if they could find any brave or foolish enough to testify. The more successful entrepreneurs could hire bodyguards but that was not an preference for the smaller traders who had to pay up or face the consequences.In Russia n all the transition to democracy and the switch to capitalist economy has genuine as the Russians and those in the rest of the world that were interested hoped or expected. These transitions unintentionally led to increased corruption and organised crime. Through a combination of the collapse of the archaic economic system, assets stripping by the Russians that brought utilities at cheap prices, government failings and last but no means least corruption. Russia was in a worse economic frame than the Soviet Union had been, as were most of the former Soviet republics. Inward foreign investment during the 1990s did not make up for the vast sums that left Russia of between $100 billion and $150 billion made by the oligarchs that asset stripped Russias industries and infra-structure and does not include any of the profits made the organised crime gangs.Foreign investors, the more sensible ones at least were put off the possibility of investing in Russia and other parts of the former Soviet Union by the high risk of their investment bee n ruined by having to pay bribes to officials and protection to crime gangs. It seems that the only people prospering in post-Soviet Russia are those that became nouveau riche by their investments or those that made their money less honestly through extortion or corruption. Poverty and un exercise that did not officially exist during the Soviet era increased alarmingly during the 1990s. Even if the poverty line is measured under a monthly income of less than $30 a month up to 40 million Russians appear to live in poverty. That is alarming for a country that has the largest part of the Soviet Union that had been a military king until1991. Economically Russias decline was remarkable for its severity, producing less than Belgium and barely a quarter more than Poland.In the immediate post-Soviet period the situation was more pell-mell because all the former republics were still maintaining the old Soviet currency and printing money as if it was going out of fashion, adding to the inf lationary consequences of ending price controls. The chaotic situation increased the ease in which organised crime gangs could operate in the former Soviet Union. Whilst the resulting hyperinflation (added to by the removal of price controls) meant that many more ordinary people had to find alternative methods of supplementing their incomes. Russia was not the slowest country to reform its economy or political institutions Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Belarus according to European Bank of reconstructive memory and Development were amongst the least reformed and most poverty struck. In contrast the Baltic States of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia progressed well enough to be admitted in the European Union by 2004.The adoption of free market capitalism brought an end to queuing in empty shops and replaced it with full shops where most people could not afford to buy anything. Hence people were searching for legal or illegal means of boosting their incomes and thus more likely to become involved in corruption and bribery. Uneconomic factories were shut making millions unemployed. Under the Soviet system people had less money but there was transgress state provisions and prices were fixed so inflation was closely non-existent. The Soviet system had given privileges to countless petty state workers and junior party members. They were known as apparatchiks, whilst high ranking officials and senior party members with better perks were known as nomenklatura. With the end of the Soviet system some of these apparatchiks and nomenklatura exchanged their privileges for money, those still in state employment that had remained honest now exchanged favours for bribes. Corruption increased during the post-Soviet era simply out of economic necessity right across all the former Soviet Union as ordinary citizens and government officials found that they did not enough to live on. Throughout the former Soviet Union, the pace of economic liberalisation varied.By the middle of 1994 the Baltic States and Russia in term of the total portion of gross domestic product generated by the private sector of the economy were well ahead of the Asian republics, Belarus and Moldova. In Estonia and Latvia, it was 55%, in Russia and Lithuania50 % with Belarus, Tajikistan and Turkmenistan lagged far crumb on only 15%. In post-Soviet Russia nomenklatura were better placed than most to survive the harsher economic climate particularly those that lived in regions such as Siberia found it harder to survive especially when state subsidies ended leaving food and fuel far more expensive than in the major cities. The collapse of communism abscission off many of the remote industrial and mining areas from the central government leading to social and economic decay. Such neglect has allowed for the harvest-feast of organised crime and corruption as desperate people turn to drugs and alcohol. Drug and alcohol abuse leads to health problems or addiction. To counter some of the incur sions into those remote areas by crime gangs the Putin government once more restricted travel in to those areas.A factor that contributed to the rise of organised crime in the post-Soviet was the wide availability of weapons for organised crime gangs and individual gangsters or thugs to use. Weapons were often obtained from members of the armed forces. Military and naval personnel were increasingly eager to sell weapons to supplement their wages, expect they had been paid on time. The Russian commanders are said to have done worse during the first Chechen war of 1994 -1996. They sold Grozny back to the rebels in August 1996 leading to the deaths of vulnerable conscripts. Corruption within the Russian military seems to be endemic, which given its role in maintaining central government ascendence and internal credential in some of the remoter regions of the Russian Federation certainly permitted and even encouraged organised crime to rise, for instance in Chechnya. During the sec ond Chechen war that began in 1999 the local police observed the illicit trade between Russian soldiers and local black marketers.These soldiers would exchange boxes of ammunition for locally distilled vodka or locally braggart(a) cannabis with the still favorable reception of their superior officers. Indeed, officers often accompanied their men when these exchanges took place. The black marketers then sell the ammunition to the Chechen fighters. Local police could deputise and arrest everybody, but they have either been told not to or bribed motto. The army was supposed to keep all the roads into Chechnya secure to prevent the rebels escaping or gaining supplies and money. However, the newsman Anna Politkovskaya was told one person on foot must pay100 roubles a light vehicle costs about 500-600 roubles. Politkovskaya did not readily accept those claims until she successfully bribed the soldiers to get past the checkpoint. The greed and corruption of the army must have been cou nterproductive. They sold ammunition that was used by the Chechens and they allowed access to restricted areas to anybody who could have smuggled weapons in and people out. The corruption of the Russian armed forces in the area in and around Chechnya lowered the security and containment of Chechen fighters and contributed to the apparent ease in which rebels were able to take hostages in the Moscow theatre during October 2002. More horrifically the siege of a Beslan high school in September 2004 showed that the Russian military were incompetent as well as riddled with corruption.Gangsters did not always buy weapons they could often steal weapons from poorly guarded or neglected military bases. Due to the Soviet Union having national service most of the organised crime gang members could already use weapons. Troops leaving the army could also consider employment as either bodyguard for the newly rich and the justifiably concerned business owners or joining the organised crime gangs t hemselves as thugs and assassins. Violent crime is probably not as prevalent as people in the West might believe, however crime gangs would have no qualms about cave in accounts with intimidation, assault and murder. Some murders have shown that the crime gangs and contract killers are able to gain hold of sophisticated weapons such as rocket launchers to kill bodyguards as well as their bosses in St Petersburg. Gangs must be well connected as well as rich to acquire such weapons.The dramatic rise in the murder rate witnessed not only the deaths of politicians (three members of the Duma were shot dead in cold blood) but also businessmen and journalists. Business executives and more menial bank employees could be and were at risk of being killed due tithe rise in corruption and organised crime. Not many gang members were hangdog of being caught and convicted, for they were convinced(p) that even if the police did catch them that either the police or the courts could be persuaded to let them get away with it. In the period between 1992and 1995, the number of killed bank workers ranging from clerks to senior executives was 46. The most publicized killing was that of Pivanilide who the president of Rosbiznesbank had been. Kivelidi was poisoned in August 1995 for not complying with the demands of organised criminals. There are still a high number of deaths because of fighting between rival gangs still demonstrating that there are enough guns and money up for grabs to make the high risks of being killed seem worthwhile. Over 2,000 gang members are gunned down every year in gang wars in the Moscow region alone. Until the Putin presidency the situation in St Petersburg had been worse although Putin seems to want to clean up his home city.The difficulty and the danger of stripping the true level of crimes being committed aided the rise in organised crime and corruption. With so many bureaucrats, police and politicians involved or thought to be involved in corrupti on much of the uncovering of crimes and evidence of corruption came from the press and journalists or even rarely independently minded politicians. For journalists it was dangerous to uncover and attempt to publish evidence and articles concerning organised crime gangs and the high levels of corruption. Considering the increasing control of the media by the state or by oligarchs whose own positions could be undermined by revelations of corruption or organised crime it has not always been wanton for reporters to go public with evidence they have gathered. To illustrate the dangerous position journalists found themselves in, 36 were killed between January 1994and May 1995 throughout the former Soviet Union whilst doing their jobs and reporting on not only corruption and organised crime but also the conflict in Chechnya.The uncovering of evidence of the corruption and dupery within the Soviet army during its time in East Germany and before its departure appeared to be a major scope f or the Murkowski Komsomolsk and its investigative journalist Dmitrii Kholod. For Kholod it proven one-story too far as a bomb blew up him and his office during October1994. Even television reporters and journalists were not immune from danger. Following his research into the corrupt or dishonest selling of television advertising Vladimir Listed was gunned down in March 1995before he could broadcast all his findings. At other times politicians, bureaucrats and business executives would inform or disclose information about their rivals real or presumed links with organised crime and corruption for their own gain rather than in the public interest or to fight corruption itself. Whilst these bouts of accusations and counter accusations occupied the politicians and press attentions they occasionally removed the expendable politicians and bureaucrats whilst leaving the level of overall corruption untouched.As noted below the Books affair would be used to force the resignations of some of the young reformers in 1999. Accusations of corruption would also be leaked to the press after an individual had lost the approval of either President Yeltsin or President Putin. The prime example of this were the accusations levelled against Boris Berezovskyafter he fell out with Putin, or more aptly when Putin regarded him as no longer useful to the Kremlin. Berezovsky is claimed to have stolen millions from his companies and state-run companies such as Aeroflot. All these events were from the early 1990s, so the Russian government had plenty of time to prove them or clear him. Berezovsky who went to out-migration in London has retaliated by campaigning against the Putin governments increasing control of power. In Russia it appears that those involved in corruption or organised crime are relatively immune from arrest if they do not upset the Kremlin, or their punishment becomes politically expedient for the government. President Putin is arguably searching for levers that will w ork to have in place a national authority that functions as normal governments do.Corruption was a fact of life in the Soviet era and now seems even more endemic in the post-Soviet period ordinary Soviet citizens were cynical about the financial honesty of their political masters and the higher-ranking communist party officials, a cynicism that continues with post-Soviet politicians and officials. Evidence of corruption and bribery would often be collected by the KGB and used if the individuals concerned fall out of favour senior party members, its successor still collects such information only now some its officers are more likely to sell sensitive information to the highest bidders. President Yeltsinonly renamed the KGB the FSB instead of abolishing it. He also retained control of the KGB records and evidence of the corruption they contained Timely uncovering of bribe victorious and corruption have often been used to discredit rivals and justify the dismissal of ministers and of ficials. Therefore, presumably there is usually enough evidence to act against many of those involved in corruption or organised crime but not always the political will or judicial authority to do so. some(prenominal) Russians believe that most if not all government ministers and officials are corrupt and susceptible to bribes. Officials are willing to risk public natural rubber and even national security as well as their reputations for the sake of bribes. Allegations and counter allegations of corruption were used in the 1990s during the power struggle between President Yeltsin and hard-liners such as Rosko and Khasbulatov.Corruption both in the Soviet era and afterwards existed and increased because the majority of those accepting bribes or using their position for gain position or cash believed that they would not get caught. Even if they did get caught the rate of convictions were not that high. Soviet era clampdowns on corruption under Andropov and Gorbachev only caught smal l fry and the same could apply during the post-Soviet era. The only notable high ranking communist to be convicted for corruption was Yuri Churbanov in 1988. Churbanovs sky pilot in law was the late Leonid Brezhnev, the one-time Soviet leader and General SecretarAnalysing Corruption and Organised Crime in RussiaAnalysing Corruption and Organised Crime in RussiaCorruption as will be examined, was nothing new in the post-Soviet economy for its perceived rise and that of organised crime had their origins in the Soviet era. In the Soviet Union private enterprise on an individual or business basis had officially not been allowed from when the New Economic Policy was abandoned in the 1920s and with the pressure collectivization of agriculture during the 1930s.Under the Stalinist State the economy was planned and commanded by the Communist Party via the Soviet Unions state structure. In theory the Soviet State controlled every aspect of the Soviet economy. It set prices it controlled ind ustrial outputs, banking services and foreign exchange rates. However, in practice there was a flourishing black market in luxury goods and foreign exchange rates before the political and economic reforms started by Mikhail Gorbachev in the 1980s. His twin policies of Glasnost and Perestroika, political openness and economic restructuring were intended to prolong the Soviet Union. Instead the Soviet Union would collapse leaving its successor states working towards democracy and capitalism whilst facing up to the problem of increasing corruption and organised crime.The level of corruption if not organised crime during the Soviet era might not be too easy to establish exactly. The Soviet authorities after all kept the true state of the economy hidden from the West even if its citizens experienced hardships and shortages. The leading members of the politburo had been the only ones with a realistic view of the economy. The liberalisation of the economy in all parts of the former Soviet Union since 1991 have generally led to an increase of corruption and organised crime. Clampdowns on organised crime and corruption have often been half hearted when they have been carried out both during and after the Soviet era. Explanations for this rise in corruption and organised crime will now be described and examined. Some of these causes pre-date the collapse of the Soviet Union whilst others emerged later.Black markets existed prior to the collapse of the Soviet Union often bringing consumers goods that were unavailable in the state-run shops, goods that were sometimes exchanged instead of sold to avoid breaking the law. Hand in hand with the black markets went corruption and bribery. Black marketers frequently resorted to bribing communist party officials, the police and the KGB or they in turn extorted money off the black marketers. The KGB sometimes recruited some of the black marketers to inform on their rivals and their customers. The more the Soviet economy faltered t he faster the black-market grew, providing people with goods not available in the shops. Those marketers that did not bribe officials often found their homes or businesses raided or got put in jail, those that paid up could go about their business undisturbed. The Soviet leadership started to have concerns about economic stagnation, organised crime and to a lesser extent corruption in the early 1980s but none of them seemed to understand the extent of the economic malaise. The long years of stagnation continued until despite the rapid deaths of three general secretaries of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) between 1982-1985.Leonid Brezhnev during his time in charge had done nothing to halt economic decline and in fact worsened it by accelerating the arms race with the United States and invading Afghanistan. It has been estimated that as much as 50% of the Soviet Unions annual budges was spent on defence or related products and projects. However, that was money that the Soviet Union no longer had to spare. His immediate successor Yuri Andropov started a campaign against bribery and corruption that petered out with his death in 1984. When Gorbachev replaced Konstantin Chernenko a year later he pledged to reform the Soviet Union. Instead his policies would promote its collapse and lead to increased corruption and organised crime in the sixteen successor states. The problem with Stalinist economic planning was that it created and perpetuated a shortage economy motivated only by harsh orders from the centre. It kept most of the people equally poor except for those that found ways around the system.By the 1980s the idea of abandoning the communist command economy in favour of capitalism and liberal democracy gained ground not only in the Soviet Union but also in Central and Eastern Europe. For the reformers could look at the neo-liberal experience of the Thatcher and Reagan administrations, perhaps the devastating social and economic effects in parts of Latin America would have been more relevant. There was of course the example of the New Economic Policy that had allowed the Soviet economy to recover from the ravages of civil war, an attractive example to communists that wanted to reform the system but also for the non-communists that wished to replace it. There was one group of pro-capitalist economists that hoped to bring in a market system to Russia, they were the young reformers. Yeger Gaider whose family was amongst the elites of the Soviet nomenklatura ironically enough headed the young reformers. They were just looking for somebody to carry out their plans and not power for themselves and would eventually team up with Boris Yeltsin a highly effective (when healthy) populist politician with only a limited understanding of economics. Alongside Yeltsin, they had the dream of dismantling communism. However, the way in which communism was dismantled across the former Soviet Union would contribute greatly to the rise of organise d crime alongside the already high levels of corruption.In the first years of Gorbachevs rule his government attempted to preserve the Soviet political system whilst reforming its economic system, little realising that these reforms would fail and thus contribute to the rise of corruption and organised crime as well as the disintegration of the Soviet Union. He wanted to make the system worktop its full capacity without moving to a capitalist economy or inducing economic suffering. The government attempted to increase productivity by reducing alcohol consumption and the sickness that was often connected to it, but he did not run an anti corruption campaign immediately. Gorbachev would have banned vodka but feared the ban would be circumvented by organised crime gangs, plus the tax revenues that kept the Soviet government solvent. One man who had started Ananta-corruption campaign was Boris Yeltsin who was the Moscow party boss until his sudden dismissal by Gorbachev during November 1987.Gorbachev believed he had removed his greatest rival but had in fact made a very basic political blunder, as Yeltsin was no longer controllable and determined to avenge his fall from power.By 1989 it became clear that the Soviet economic system was unsustainable or beyond reforming and Gorbachev introduced some capitalist measures. Those measures included allowing small private businesses to operate from August 1990 and a series of de-regulations and privatisations between October 1990 and July 1991. Economic reforms brought increased opportunities to organised criminals and budding capitalist entrepreneurs, a distinction in the former Soviet Union that is not always clear. The sudden creations of small businesses increased chances for investments and money laundering or even to takeover privatised companies. Decades of communist economic and political rule left a legacy that was difficult to shake off immediately in the post-Soviet era. Yeltsin and his contemporaries found it difficult to see the world from outside of a communist perspective. The communist legacy of patronage, privileges, corruption and perks would contribute to the rise of corruption and organised crime in the post-Soviet era. As the system started to collapse across the Soviet Union law and order began to decline with it thus allowing increased opportunities for organised crime and corruption as well as increased nationalist and ethnic tensions.The political disintegration of the Soviet Union went hand in hand with its economic disintegration and declining levels of law and order in all the successor republics. The end of the Soviet Union was hastened by the failure of the communist coup in August 1991. The Baltic States had already broke away from the Soviet Union and was already on their way to capitalist economies. Russian president Boris Yeltsin seeming to stand for the twin transition from communist state to liberal democracy and planned socialist economy to neo-liberal capitalis m although this is not exactly what happened. Contrary to Mikhail Gorbachev, Boris Yeltsin had believed that the breakup of the Soviet Union could be a positive rather than a disastrous event although many of his Russian compatriots might not have hold with him. For the other former republics, it was a case of independence at last. Perhaps those that took advantage of the break up through organised crime or corruption would have agreed with him. The Yeltsin government at first enthusiastically backed rapid and radical reforms, radical economics carried out by a group of advisors dubbed the the young reformers. Russia and the other former republics of the Soviet Union had very primitive banking and financial systems that presented apparently ideal opportunities for Russian and foreign investors. Those acting as go-betweens in business deals could make small fortunes by doing so. The transition to capitalism offered the prospect of making millions, it also led to the increase in orga nised crime and corruption as gangsters threatened investors, businesses and often fought each other. The Russian and other governments seemed incapable of monitoring, containing or preventing that rise.The Yeltsin government was hampered in its efforts to control and administer the regions let alone fight the rise in crime because the remaining regional governors were by and large communist nomenklatura and apparatchiks and unwilling to do as Moscow commanded. These bureaucrats forged links with industrialists in their region providing basis for ongoing and future corruption. The bitter power struggles between President and Parliament during the 1992-1993 period distracted them from trying to solve the countrys problems and allowed the regions greater autonomy and the increasing number of organised crime gangs free rein across much of Russia and the rest of the former Soviet Union. They also spent much time and effort trying to persuade the public the other side was more corrupt an d had greater links to organised crime than they did. One deputy governor indicated the scale of corruption in the remoter parts of Siberia that to start accompany you probably have to bribe forty bureaucrats.Organised crime gangs used the decline in government control to organise protection rackets to fleece investors and small businesses. There was an alarming increase in violent crimes and murders as gangs competed for control of their victims and clients or punished those that would not pay for their dubious protection. The number of killings related to gang warfare escalated dramatically. Moscow and the newly renamed St Petersburg have been the centres of most of that gang warfare. Corruption was not merely confined to the Mafia gangs it also extended to the police, the armed forces and civil servants. In Russia traffic police were involved in robbing motorists also teaming up with local gangs to force motorists to hand over their cars, or to pay them fines for non-existent off ences or face their cars being confiscated. Corruption and the buying and selling of anything and everything was so widespread that young female university students would aim to become hard currency call girls or the mistresses of oligarchs or wealthy businessmen, whilst jobless youths would advertise their services for contract killings.One ruthless organised crime gang even went as far as murdering car owners and disposing of their bodies to steal their cars. Organised crime and the number of crime gangs increased dramatically as the political elites spent more time arguing amongst each other rather than fighting crime and corruption. Nobody in the public or the media believed that Boris Yeltsin would succeed in rooting out organised crime and corruption, after all every single Soviet leader had promised to do the same since 1917. After all his only previous crack down on corruption and organised crime in Moscow had been stopped it its tracks by Gorbachev when he was sacked as the Moscow party boss. The official crime figures for 1992 give a strong indication of the deteriorating law and order situation. The number of murders had increased by 40%whilst there was an even larger increase in robbery up by 60%. The overall number of registered crimes, bearing in mind that many crimes remained unreported went up to 2.76 million. In fact, the contending elites accused each other of corruption to score points off each other whilst the public were not interested in their squabbles and the 3,000or so crime gangs carried on regardless. Of the newly private run business in Russia and the Commonwealth of Independent States those3,000 gangs were able to pocket perhaps as much as 40 % of the turnovers early as 1993.Corruption was never too far from the surface in the former Soviet Union. It should have not been a surprise therefore that corruption and organised crime would rise in the post-Soviet as they already headstrong foundations and connections to outside crime gang s. During the Soviet era if an individual knew or bribed the right officials they could get the best luxury items, property deals or their children into the finest schools or universities. So, nobody could doubt that there would be greater levels of corruption when the restraints of the Soviet system were removed. In fact, corruption dated back into the Imperial Russian past, were the civil service had been unsalaried but able to accept gifts or payments in kind. The CPSU may have claimed to be responsible for the leading role in society and the economy, some of its members took a leading role in the black market or for a small bribe get people things that would not normally be available.In Belarus the movement towards independence was given a new impetus byte desire to be rid of greedy and corrupt communist party leaders. The unravelling of the Soviet hegemony over Eastern Europe gave an opportunity for the more entrepreneurial members of the withdrawing Soviet army to make their f ortunes. The pickings could be rich for the Soviet army had large areas of land and housing to sell. When Gorbachev made a deal with the West German government to sell Soviet military bases in the former East Germany back to them most of the best pickings had already gone. The Soviet defence minister Dmitrii Yazov happily joined in the schemes that led to the disappearance of the Soviet army assets without a trace. Yazov may have enjoyed making money for himself but he was wholeheartedly against political and economic reform. He would be one of the main leaders of the August 1991 coup. After all, under the Soviet system the higher an individuals position within the party, the KGB or the armed forces they could expect greater share of the perks and the spoils.Just how much money the corrupt communist party members made may not beknown exactly, much of the evidence was destroyed just before the final failed coup of August 1991. Those party members that did not get into trouble followi ng the coup could find themselves in a good position to make money in the brave new post -Soviet world. That was because they already knew how to operate in corrupt systems and some already had links with organised crime. For many of the small traders that operated largely illegally during the Soviet era the only real difference between the past and the post-Soviet present was whom they paid for the privilege of staying in business. Now they had to pay organised crime gangs to stay in business and to stay alive rather than bribe communist party officials or members of the KGB, or if they were unlucky they would have to pay them all. Corruption and organised crime increased in the post-Soviet era, but it had great potential during the Soviet era and the right conditions would fuel a massive expansion.For much of the former Soviet Union these conditions were present in the early 1990s. Petty crime was rumoured to be rife amongst civil servants and state employees, for instance in 1993 the Russian Interior Ministry recorded 13,000 such crimes, that was thought to be the tip of the iceberg. It was estimated that virtually all shops paid protection and perhaps four fifths of businesses and financial institutes did the same. The organised crime gangs had a virtual free reign on their prospective victims, as the number of untainted police was inadequate even if they could find any brave or foolish enough to testify. The more successful entrepreneurs could hire bodyguards but that was not an option for the smaller traders who had to pay up or face the consequences.In Russia neither the transition to democracy and the switch to capitalist economy has developed as the Russians and those in the rest of the world that were interested hoped or expected. These transitions unintentionally led to increased corruption and organised crime. Through a combination of the collapse of the archaic economic system, assets stripping by the Russians that brought utilities at cheap price s, government failings and last but no means least corruption. Russia was in a worse economic position than the Soviet Union had been, as were most of the former Soviet republics. Inward foreign investment during the 1990s did not make up for the vast sums that left Russia of between $100 billion and $150 billion made by the oligarchs that asset stripped Russias industries and infra-structure and does not include any of the profits made the organised crime gangs.Foreign investors, the more sensible ones at least were put off the possibility of investing in Russia and other parts of the former Soviet Union by the high risk of their investment been ruined by having to pay bribes to officials and protection to crime gangs. It seems that the only people prospering in post-Soviet Russia are those that became nouveau riche by their investments or those that made their money less honestly through extortion or corruption. Poverty and unemployment that did not officially exist during the Sov iet era increased alarmingly during the 1990s. Even if the poverty line is measured below a monthly income of less than $30 a month up to 40 million Russians appear to live in poverty. That is alarming for a country that has the largest part of the Soviet Union that had been a military superpower until1991. Economically Russias decline was remarkable for its severity, producing less than Belgium and barely a quarter more than Poland.In the immediate post-Soviet period the situation was more chaotic because all the former republics were still maintaining the old Soviet currency and printing money as if it was going out of fashion, adding to the inflationary consequences of ending price controls. The chaotic situation increased the ease in which organised crime gangs could operate in the former Soviet Union. Whilst the resulting hyperinflation (added to by the removal of price controls) meant that many more ordinary people had to find alternative methods of supplementing their incomes . Russia was not the slowest country to reform its economy or political institutions Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Belarus according to European Bank of Reconstruction and Development were amongst the least reformed and most poverty struck. In contrast the Baltic States of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia progressed well enough to be admitted in the European Union by 2004.The adoption of free market capitalism brought an end to queuing in empty shops and replaced it with full shops where most people could not afford to buy anything. Hence people were searching for legal or illegal means of boosting their incomes and thus more likely to become involved in corruption and bribery. Uneconomic factories were shut making millions unemployed. Under the Soviet system people had less money but there was better state provisions and prices were fixed so inflation was virtually non-existent. The Soviet system had given privileges to countless petty state workers and junior party members. They were known as apparatchiks, whilst high ranking officials and senior party members with better perks were known as nomenklatura. With the end of the Soviet system some of these apparatchiks and nomenklatura exchanged their privileges for money, those still in state employment that had remained honest now exchanged favours for bribes. Corruption increased during the post-Soviet era simply out of economic necessity right across all the former Soviet Union as ordinary citizens and government officials found that they did not enough to live on. Throughout the former Soviet Union, the pace of economic liberalisation varied.By the middle of 1994 the Baltic States and Russia in terms of the total percentage of gross domestic product generated by the private sector of the economy were well ahead of the Asian republics, Belarus and Moldova. In Estonia and Latvia, it was 55%, in Russia and Lithuania50 % with Belarus, Tajikistan and Turkmenistan lagged far behind on only 15%. In post-Soviet Russia nomenklatura were better placed than most to survive the harsher economic climate particularly those that lived in regions such as Siberia found it harder to survive especially when state subsidies ended leaving food and fuel far more expensive than in the major cities. The collapse of communism cut off many of the remote industrial and mining areas from the central government leading to social and economic decay. Such neglect has allowed for the growth of organised crime and corruption as desperate people turn to drugs and alcohol. Drug and alcohol abuse leads to health problems or addiction. To counter some of the incursions into those remote areas by crime gangs the Putin government once more restricted travel in to those areas.A factor that contributed to the rise of organised crime in the post-Soviet was the wide availability of weapons for organised crime gangs and individual gangsters or thugs to use. Weapons were often obtained from members of the armed forces. Military and naval personnel were increasingly eager to sell weapons to supplement their wages, assuming they had been paid on time. The Russian commanders are said to have done worse during the first Chechen war of 1994 -1996. They sold Grozny back to the rebels in August 1996 leading to the deaths of defenceless conscripts. Corruption within the Russian military seems to be endemic, which given its role in maintaining central government authority and internal security in some of the remoter regions of the Russian Federation certainly permitted and even encouraged organised crime to rise, for instance in Chechnya. During the second Chechen war that began in 1999 the local police observed the illicit trade between Russian soldiers and local black marketers.These soldiers would exchange boxes of ammunition for locally distilled vodka or locally grown cannabis with the tacit approval of their superior officers. Indeed, officers often accompanied their men when these exchanges took place. The black marketers then sell the ammunition to the Chechen fighters. Local police could intervene and arrest everybody, but they have either been told not to or bribed motto. The army was supposed to keep all the roads into Chechnya secure to prevent the rebels escaping or gaining supplies and money. However, the reporter Anna Politkovskaya was told one person on foot must pay100 roubles a light vehicle costs about 500-600 roubles. Politkovskaya did not readily accept those claims until she successfully bribed the soldiers to get past the checkpoint. The greed and corruption of the army must have been counterproductive. They sold ammunition that was used by the Chechens and they allowed access to restricted areas to anybody who could have smuggled weapons in and people out. The corruption of the Russian armed forces in the area in and around Chechnya lowered the security and containment of Chechen fighters and contributed to the apparent ease in which rebels were able to take hostages in th e Moscow theatre during October 2002. More horrifically the siege of a Beslan high school in September 2004 showed that the Russian military were incompetent as well as riddled with corruption.Gangsters did not always buy weapons they could often steal weapons from poorly guarded or neglected military bases. Due to the Soviet Union having national service most of the organised crime gang members could already use weapons. Troops leaving the army could also consider employment as either bodyguard for the newly rich and the justifiably concerned business owners or joining the organised crime gangs themselves as thugs and assassins. Violent crime is probably not as prevalent as people in the West might believe, however crime gangs would have no qualms about settling accounts with intimidation, assault and murder. Some murders have shown that the crime gangs and contract killers are able to gain hold of sophisticated weapons such as rocket launchers to kill bodyguards as well as their b osses in St Petersburg. Gangs must be well connected as well as rich to acquire such weapons.The dramatic rise in the murder rate witnessed not only the deaths of politicians (three members of the Duma were shot dead in cold blood) but also businessmen and journalists. Business executives and more lowly bank employees could be and were at risk of being killed due tithe rise in corruption and organised crime. Not many gang members were afraid of being caught and convicted, for they were confident that even if the police did catch them that either the police or the courts could be persuaded to let them get away with it. In the period between 1992and 1995, the number of killed bank workers ranging from clerks to senior executives was 46. The most publicized killing was that of Pivanilide who the president of Rosbiznesbank had been. Kivelidi was poisoned in August 1995 for not complying with the demands of organised criminals. There are still a high number of deaths because of fighting between rival gangs still demonstrating that there are enough guns and money up for grabs to make the high risks of being killed seem worthwhile. Over 2,000 gang members are gunned down every year in gang wars in the Moscow region alone. Until the Putin presidency the situation in St Petersburg had been worse although Putin seems to want to clean up his home city.The difficulty and the danger of uncovering the true level of crimes being committed aided the rise in organised crime and corruption. With so many bureaucrats, police and politicians involved or thought to be involved in corruption much of the uncovering of crimes and evidence of corruption came from the press and journalists or even rarely independently minded politicians. For journalists it was dangerous to uncover and attempt to publish evidence and articles concerning organised crime gangs and the high levels of corruption. Considering the increasing control of the media by the state or by oligarchs whose own positions could be undermined by revelations of corruption or organised crime it has not always been easy for reporters to go public with evidence they have gathered. To illustrate the dangerous position journalists found themselves in, 36 were killed between January 1994and May 1995 throughout the former Soviet Union whilst doing their jobs and reporting on not only corruption and organised crime but also the conflict in Chechnya.The uncovering of evidence of the corruption and fraud within the Soviet army during its time in East Germany and before its departure appeared to be a major scope for the Murkowski Komsomolsk and its investigative journalist Dmitrii Kholod. For Kholod it proved one-story too far as a bomb blew up him and his office during October1994. Even television reporters and journalists were not immune from danger. Following his research into the corrupt or dishonest selling of television advertising Vladimir Listed was gunned down in March 1995before he could broadcast all his findings. At other times politicians, bureaucrats and business executives would inform or leak information about their rivals real or presumed links with organised crime and corruption for their own gain rather than in the public interest or to fight corruption itself. Whilst these bouts of accusations and counter accusations occupied the politicians and press attentions they occasionally removed the expendable politicians and bureaucrats whilst leaving the level of overall corruption untouched.As noted below the Books affair would be used to force the resignations of some of the young reformers in 1999. Accusations of corruption would also be leaked to the press after an individual had lost the approval of either President Yeltsin or President Putin. The prime example of this were the accusations levelled against Boris Berezovskyafter he fell out with Putin, or more aptly when Putin regarded him as no longer useful to the Kremlin. Berezovsky is claimed to have stolen millions f rom his companies and state-run companies such as Aeroflot. All these events were from the early 1990s, so the Russian government had plenty of time to prove them or clear him. Berezovsky who went to exile in London has retaliated by campaigning against the Putin governments increasing control of power. In Russia it appears that those involved in corruption or organised crime are relatively immune from arrest if they do not upset the Kremlin, or their punishment becomes politically expedient for the government. President Putin is arguably searching for levers that will work to have in place a national authority that functions as normal governments do.Corruption was a fact of life in the Soviet era and now seems even more endemic in the post-Soviet period ordinary Soviet citizens were cynical about the financial honesty of their political masters and the higher-ranking communist party officials, a cynicism that continues with post-Soviet politicians and officials. Evidence of corrup tion and bribery would often be collected by the KGB and used if the individuals concerned fall out of favour senior party members, its successor still collects such information only now some its officers are more likely to sell sensitive information to the highest bidders. President Yeltsinonly renamed the KGB the FSB instead of abolishing it. He also retained control of the KGB records and evidence of the corruption they contained Timely uncovering of bribe taking and corruption have often been used to discredit rivals and justify the dismissal of ministers and officials. Therefore, presumably there is usually enough evidence to act against many of those involved in corruption or organised crime but not always the political will or judicial authority to do so. Many Russians believe that most if not all government ministers and officials are corrupt and susceptible to bribes. Officials are willing to risk public safety and even national security as well as their reputations for the sake of bribes. Allegations and counter allegations of corruption were used in the 1990s during the power struggle between President Yeltsin and hard-liners such as Rosko and Khasbulatov.Corruption both in the Soviet era and afterwards existed and increased because the majority of those accepting bribes or using their position for gain position or cash believed that they would not get caught. Even if they did get caught the rate of convictions were not that high. Soviet era clampdowns on corruption under Andropov and Gorbachev only caught small fry and the same could apply during the post-Soviet era. The only notable high ranking communist to be convicted for corruption was Yuri Churbanov in 1988. Churbanovs father in law was the late Leonid Brezhnev, the one-time Soviet leader and General Secretar

Analysis of the Head Start Program Essay -- Educational Policy, Class

The purpose of this essay is to offer a concise description of the toss starting time program, discuss the historical minimize of the policy, and analyze the economic and political forces that have influenced the development of the program. The essay also seeks to evaluate both the manifest and latent functions of the policy, consider the current debate some Head Start, describe the ideologies and values that have framed the debate around Head Start, and offer recommendations regarding the program.Head Start ProgramOverview of the PolicyThe Head Start Program, typically referred to solely as Head Start, is offered by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The program was inaugurated in 1964 as a means of preparing children from low-income families to enter kindergarten with a higher level of preparation (Gillette, 2010). Head Start is funded through the Head Start Act of 1981, which was reauthorized in 2007. Head Start has a budget of over $7 billion and has its own t eachers and aides (Banner, 2011). In pecuniary year 2009, the latest year for which data is available from the Administration for Children and Families (2010), the home to the Office of Head Start within the Department of Health and Human Services had an enrollment of 904,153, of which 3% were five-year-olds or older, 51% were four-year-olds, 46% were three-year-olds, and 10% were under three eld of age. Children three and under are part of what is known as Early Head Start, an extension of the program that serves the youngest children. The Administration for Children and Families further disclosed that, in fiscal year 2010, 39.9% of children enrolled in Head Start were white, 30% were African-American or Black, and 35.9% were Latino. The sum of the... ...y. Cambridge, MA Harvard University Press. Barnett, W.S. & Hustedt, J.T. (2003). Head Starts lasting benefits. Infants and Young Children, 18(1), 16-24.Black, E. & Black, M. (2003). The skip over of southern republicans. Camb ridge, MA Harvard University Press.Gillette, M.L. (2010). Launching the war on poverty. Oxford, England Oxford University Press.Meyers, M.K. & Gornick, J.C. (2003). Public or private responsibility? Early childhood education and care, inequality, and the welfare state. Journal of comparative Family Studies, 34, 379-411. Mindick, B. (1986). Social engineering in family matters. New York, NY Praeger.Vinovskis, M.A. (2008). The birth of head start. Chicago, IL University of Chicago Press.Wainryb, C., Smetana, J.G., & Turiel. E. (2008). Social development, social inequalities, and social justice. New York, NY CRC Press.

Male Superiority within Domestic Life :: essays research papers

Male Superiority inside Domestic LifeThroughout the book To the Lighthouse by Virginia Woolf, there are many burdens upon relationships in the storyline. One such burden is that of male superiority through the belief of male superiority relationships are in a bad way(p) because males constantly need to prove that they are better then females. This stress causes problems within marriages and affects the domestic life of husbands and wives. The unspoken problem between the sexes causes tension and affects thoughts shown within internal monologues more then it directly affects events. Men in this novel need sympathy from the women in order to prove their superiority because by get sympathy from a woman the man is acting superior over the woman. Mr. Ramsey proves this fact when he works to receive Lilys sympathy. This is shown when Lily thinks, You shant touch your canvas, he seemed to say, bearing down on her, until youve given me what I want from you (150) about Mr. Ramsey as he app roaches her while she is painting. In this scene what Mr. Ramsey wants from Lily is sympathy and he acts as if he is in control over Lily and therefore can force her to give him sympathy. Eventually, Lily gives Mr. Ramsay the sympathy he wants which is shown when she thinks to herself, Why, at this completely inappropriate moment, when he was stoop over her shoe, should she be so tormented with sympathy for him that, as she stooped too, the blood rushed to her face and thinking of her callousness (she had called him a play-actor) she felt her look swell and tingle with tears? (154) and thus feels sympathy for Mr. Ramsay even when she decidedly did not want to. Not only does Lily feel sympathy for Mr. Ramsay but she in any case feels bad about thinking negatively about him. Lilys feeling of guilt shows Mr. Ramsay being superior to her that is in turn an example of male supremacy. During the dinner party table discussion, Mr. Tansley shows male supremacy when he thinks, he was not issue to talk the kind of rot these people wanted him to talk. He was not going to be condescended by these silly women (85). Mr. Tansleys thoughts in this quotation show that he is putting himself above women by staying independent of their conversation therefore presentation that they have no power over him. Mr. Tansley continues to exhibit male supremacy when his need to assert himself arises.